Issue linkage

Sometimes I run into areas where I suddenly realize that I have unconsidered assumptions that aren't shared by the field. It's always odd.

For instance, there's this concept in negotiation called issues linkage, which, in practice, basically means that if you're negotiating about one issue, you might choose to bring a separate (possibly related, but possibly totally unrelated) issue into the negotiation.

One line of reasoning behind this idea is that you do it to introduce opportunities to trade: if you give me what I'm trying to get on issue 1, I'll give you this concession I know you want on issue 2.

This is to me such an obvious logical interpretation of the practice that it was sort of startling to find that it's something of a latter interpretation. The prior, "classical" interpretation is that it's a way of using leverage: I have power in issue area 1, therefore I'll bring in issue area 2 where I have less power in an attempt to try to generalize the power I have in issue area 1.